NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

Reply to thread

Message

Though there is little chance I can be as eloquent as recent posts, I do have to echo the sentiment. Science is based in repeatability and observation enveloped in an aura of honest intellectual curiosity. The vast majority of scientists have an ethical umbrella surrounding their actions and their research methodologies. But, lets be honest, you put 10 random people in a room and at least one of them will definitely dishonest, immoral, and unethical. So, you cant rule it out that some have skewed results to meet an agenda. But to blanket them all with that sentiment would be wrong. Collectively, I think that scientists are trustworthy.

[QUOTE="Ron Collins, post: 30377, member: 574"] Though there is little chance I can be as eloquent as recent posts, I do have to echo the sentiment. Science is based in repeatability and observation enveloped in an aura of honest intellectual curiosity. The vast majority of scientists have an ethical umbrella surrounding their actions and their research methodologies. But, lets be honest, you put 10 random people in a room and at least one of them will definitely dishonest, immoral, and unethical. So, you cant rule it out that some have skewed results to meet an agenda. But to blanket them all with that sentiment would be wrong. Collectively, I think that scientists are trustworthy. [/QUOTE]

Verification